Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 94
94 Truck Drayage Productivity Guide
input. Although gate transaction data might be obtained through a railroad representative, issues
of accuracy, completeness, and interpretation may need to involve the contract operators.
Container Depot Data
Most container depots are privately operated, either by one of a few regional or national
companies, or by local entrepreneurs. They store containers for ocean carriers and leasing
companies. Depots also maintain and repair containers, but the activity model does not dis-
tinguish trips for repair or maintenance from trips for storage. Container depots keep elec-
tronic records of their transactions, but as private companies, their cooperation in providing
data is strictly voluntary.
Shipper and Receiver Data
Obtaining reliable distance and volume information for shipper (export) and receiver (import)
trips can be a considerable challenge. The actual locations and container volumes are known only
to the shippers and consignees themselves, and perhaps to the drayage firms that serve them. Port
marketing and sales departments can be a source of insight on the actual locations of port
customers and for customer contact information.
Street Turn and Crosstown Data
Ordinarily, there is no organization that keeps data on street turns and crosstown trips, so esti-
mates are required. Two factors are at stake: the frequency of street turns (reuse of import con-
tainers for export loads) and other crosstown trips, and the distance commonly traveled. In both
instances, major drayage firms would be the best sources for estimates.
National Drayage Cost and Emissions Estimates
In NCFRP Project 14, the study team used the EPA SmartWay DrayFLEET Model to estimate
vehicle activity associated with port drayage, its cost, and resulting emissions. In 2008, U.S. ports
handled a total of 22,597,601 TEU in about 13 million individual containers. The DrayFLEET
Model was used to estimate the operational, financial, and environmental costs of container
drayage at the nation's ports.
The DrayFLEET Model was configured with a weighted average drayage distance of 5 miles
and no waiting time at customer locations. These modifications effectively restrict the model to
a 5-mile working range around the port terminals. This step was necessary to focus the analysis
on differences in terminal and port-area operations rather than to have the potential improve-
ments observed by over-the-road operations.
The 13 million containers required an estimated 41.6 million drayage trip legs, an average of
3.2 per container. Those trips required an estimated 39.1 million driver and tractor hours to
cover 326 million miles.
The model estimates that 45% of the drayage hours in the vicinity of the ports were spent
idling, which is generally consistent with most driver survey results. About 26% of the hours were
spent in "creep" mode, essentially low-speed, stop-and-go operation typical of queuing or in-
terminal operation. This allocation highlights the amount of time--nearly 18 million hours
annually--that drayage drivers and their tractors spend idling. In those operating hours, port
drayage tractors burned an estimated 69.9 million gallons of diesel fuel and emitted 782,613 tons
of CO2, the major greenhouse gas impact (see Table 122).
